Topic: Appearance of waves in arrangement

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • #870
    acousmod
    Participant

    Hi Frits,

    This is a very little bug, but it is annoying at least : the accuracy of the drawings of the sounds in the arrangement depends on the vertical zoom value.
    It corresponds to the amplitude values only one time on two. When you change the height of a track step by step, it alternates between a “good” and a “strange” drawing.
    It is of course more visible when there is a lot of channels or when the height is small.

    It is not vital, but if you have some time to look at this…

    Thanks !
    Jean-Marc

    #7091
    acousmod
    Participant

    Some example :
    good :

    not good :

    good :

    not good :

    good

    etc.

    #7092
    Conquistador
    Participant

    Bizarre. I don’t think I have ever seen that.

    Are you seeing this in 1.63?

    #7095
    Zynewave
    Keymaster

    This happens because the rounding errors are different depending on whether the resized wave display is even or odd pixels in height. The ideal solution to this would be to draw anti-aliased waveforms, but this will have a big impact on the graphics update speed. Perhaps within a couple of years a standard computer system will be sufficiently fast so that I can substitute much of my graphics code with true anti-aliased drawing. Another hack solution would be to always restrict channel heights to an odd pixel count, which on the other hand would result in less fluent zooming.

    #7098
    acousmod
    Participant

    Another hack solution would be to always restrict channel heights to an odd pixel count, which on the other hand would result in less fluent zooming.

    For me it would be a perfect solution.

    I don’t know how it is made in Nuendo, but the appearance is consistant whatever the zoom value is.

    Perhaps that a possibility to have an amplitude zoom slider in the arrange like in the sound editor will also help for small amplitudes.

    #7165
    Conquistador
    Participant

    Another hack solution would be to always restrict channel heights to an odd pixel count, which on the other hand would result in less fluent zooming.

    Hmmm, I really don’t think I would want less fluent zooming Frits, a step backward there. I get the feeling you do not want this either.

    Equally if the impact on the current graphics update speed would be affected in any way I would prefer to defintiely explore another solution.

    Unless…you could somehow make the hack (restricting channel heights to an odd pixel count) an optional extra. If you implement it this way then at least users like me can switch this behaviour off.

    I would certainly not prefer to see this as a hidden default global setting that cannot be changed. Definitely not IMHO.

    If possible Frits if you are to go ahead with this…please implement it as an optional solution.

    Thanks.

    #8159
    Zynewave
    Keymaster

    @acousmod wrote:

    Another hack solution would be to always restrict channel heights to an odd pixel count, which on the other hand would result in less fluent zooming.

    For me it would be a perfect solution.

    As part of the ongoing work on the fade-in/out feature, I’ve now changed this so that each channel is always set to an unequal pixel height. Thus you won’t get the alternating thin/fat center line when you zoom vertically. Coming up in 1.73.

    #8160
    Conquistador
    Participant

    Thanks for the update. πŸ˜‰

    #8164
    acousmod
    Participant

    As part of the ongoing work on the fade-in/out feature, I’ve now changed this so that each channel is always set to an unequal pixel height. Thus you won’t get the alternating thin/fat center line when you zoom vertically. Coming up in 1.73.

    Woah ! Excellent !
    Thank you very much Frits !

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Β© 2021 Zynewave